In the coming weeks, we will communicate decisions to each applicant who participated in our most recent LOI cycle. We know that receiving a decision can generate further questions about how Tinker evaluates and prioritizes applications. With that in mind, we want to take this opportunity to provide more insight into how Tinker selects the very small number of LOIs that advance to the proposal stage.
Meanwhile, over the course of the coming year, we will continue to explore how we can communicate our program priorities and grantmaking policies as clearly as possible to prospective applicants, and whether to continue and expand learning spaces such as our recent informational webinars about our Education program.
The context: growing demand for Tinker funding
In a recent post, we noted the sharp increase in applications in the last few years. We also shared some adjustments to our letter of inquiry (LOI) process in 2025 that maintain our commitment to hosting open calls for funding while ensuring our small team can meet its other responsibilities, including accompanying existing grantees and partners.
As we conclude a new LOI cycle, we have once again received an unprecedented number of applications across all programs, approximately 1,400 in total. This means that for every proposal invited, we will decline 75 to 100 LOIs.
Each application to Tinker will continue to be reviewed with care by a Tinker program officer. However, while we have always strived to provide individualized feedback to applicants, given the current volume of applications, we can no longer do so. In light of this, we are sharing a list of the most common reasons we decline LOIs. We hope this is useful to organizations that have applied or will apply to Tinker, and that it may even be helpful in developing proposals for other funders.
Frequent reasons that Tinker declines projects
Each cycle, our team must decline applications that we find worthy of funding given that a only small number of the most compelling LOIs advance in the process. In other cases, the project has specific weaknesses that lead to a declination.
In addition to assessing the intrinsic fit and potential of each proposed project, we consider a range of portfolio factors such as budget, geography, and program area. Again, not all worthy projects can advance once we account for these factors.
Common reasons for LOIs to be declined include:
- While aligned with Tinker’s program priorities and proposing a meaningful contribution, other projects offered a stronger fit and/or potential for impact in line with Tinker’s strategy.
- The project does not align with Tinker’s program priorities.
- The resources required exceed Tinker’s funding guidelines or appear to be mismatched with the project activities described.
- The applicant organization does not appear to have the capabilities or credibility to execute the work. This is a particular consideration for organizations proposing work outside their existing geographies or that entails engagement with communities with which they do not have existing relationships.
- The potential impact or contribution of the work is unclear or falls short when compared with similar interventions.
- The organization is working at a very local or limited scale with no plans to effect or influence broader change.
- The project objectives cannot be realistically delivered – or meaningfully advanced – in the proposed timeframe.
- The project is similar to an LOI from the same organization that was previously declined by the foundation (unless a program officer has invited the organization to reapply).
- The project appears to have significant unacknowledged risks or ethical issues.
- The project involves direct or grassroots lobbying, legislative activity, or electioneering – all of which are prohibited under U.S. tax law and cannot be funded by Tinker.
- The project features activities that Tinker explicitly does not fund, e.g., funding for individuals; annual or fundraising appeals; annual or other fund-raising appeals; school tuition or scholarships; child sponsorships; support for building construction or major equipment purchases; production costs for film, television, and radio projects; art museum collections, films, and exhibits; endowments.
The majority of project concepts received and reviewed by Tinker propose thoughtful work and reflect the deep contributions of civil society organizations in Latin America. We feel privileged to learn from the work of each organization that applies to Tinker and appreciate the understanding of applicants whose collective work has so much potential.
